Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Ashes Unrest, Peers Party with Russians, Barbie, Omid Djalili

Episode Date: July 3, 2023

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers react to the unsportsmanlike dismissal of Jonny Bairstow at Lord's yesterday. Also looks into why British Peers were seen partying with Russians as well as whether Barbie is a feminist icon. Piers is joined by comedian Omid Djalili on topics including migration and Iran. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm Piers Morgan. On the sense that tonight a sporting outrage becomes an international scandal. Australia's cricketers didn't break the rules. What's the point of winning without integrity? As Putin's bombs panned Ukraine, his top man in London hosted a lavish party with ladies of vodka to cheer on the illegal invasion. What the hell was a lord representing the British Conservative Party doing there? I'll ask him, he joins me live. Plus, we're joined by a well-known movie star and comedian who's now turned the spotlight on free beat and the vicious regime in his native Iran.

He'll join me live in the studio. Live from the news building in London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensurate. Good evening for London. Welcome to Pierce Morgan Uncensored. First of all, an apology for the state of me. I have a summer head cold, those rare but vicious little things, which has reduced my voice to Barry White's secret brother. Some apologies for that.

We'll have to just get through this together. Now, you don't need to be a cricket fan, or even a sports fan to be incensed by bad sportsmanship. Every so often, there's a sporting-related abuse of basic fair play that's so outrageous it transcends the game to become a national or even global Ferrari. The bedlam that broke out during the Ashes test match at Laws yesterday most definitely met that mark on and off the pitch. The home of cricket witnessed an act of unsporting treachery by Australia,

which got the entire nation raging. Let's have a look at it. It's another short ball. Oh, now this is going to be interesting. Johnny Beirsto's walked out of his crease here. This could well be out. A double blow for Australia. Out for 10.

Well, England's Johnny Beirstow, last week, held a hearover, dispatching just-top oil protesters, ducks a ball and then scratches his mark inside the crease. Something that suggests that he was in the apparently mistaken belief, the over was finished. That's what Batsman do when an over is finished. The umpires were preparing to move on for the next over, so Bear Stowe wanders up the wicket

to speak to his batting partner, England's captain, Ben Stokes. Again, this is what most batswoman would do at the end of an over. The Australian wicketkeeper Alex Carey threw the ball at the stumps anyway, and Bear Stowe was subsequently given out. Now, according to the laws of the cricket, let me be clear. That was the correct decision. The law says that is out. Australia didn't cheat.

Well, not like they cheated a few years ago when they were caught using using sandpaper to manipulate the ball. That was cheating. But what they did at Lords yesterday wasn't in the spirit of the game. They knew, we all knew, that Bear Stowe wasn't seeking to gain any advantage. He genuinely thought the ball was dead, the over was finished. This was the equivalent of a footballer tapping the ball into an empty net where everyone else on the pitch believes the game has stopped. And the reaction from the crowd, well, it was unprecedented. Now, I've been going to Lord since I was a teenager. I've never been. never seen or heard anything like that, not in the hallowed confines of the pavilion.

Set the scene a bit here, Lords is a place which embodies the genteel qualities of cricket. Think of a braying English football crowd, foaming with impassion, fury, every perceived sleight, and then imagine the exact opposite. That's, well, that's the Lord's Pavilion in particular. Well-heel members pay thousands for a spot in the long room, often waiting 20 or 30 years for the chance to become members. That room dates back to the 19th century. This kind of raucous abusive reaction, I have to say, was unacceptable. But it's also unprecedented. And in a measure of the pain this has caused, Britain's biggest newspaper cleared his front page for the story, branding it out of order.

They quoted one outraged cricket fan who said, Australia, that is pathetic. How can he possibly want an national test match like that? That fan was me. Well, Ben Stokes agreed with me and said the same thing. and Britain's Prime Minister Rish Sunak agreed with both of us. His official spokesman said, he simply wouldn't want to win a game in the manner Australia did and asked whether Mr Sunak thought that Australia's actions

were not in keeping with the spirit of cricket. The spokesman added simply yes. And that's the point. There are the rules of the game, which Australia clearly followed. And then there's the spirit of the game, which, in my opinion, Australia ran over with a bulldozer. It's hard to define exactly what constitutes the spirit of the game. game. But most sports fans, we kind of know it when we see it being abused. It's why Diego

Maradonna, genius though he was, will always be thought of as a cheat by no football fans for his hand of God goal against us in the World Cup, and why Paolo DiCannio will always be revered by contrast when he did this while playing for West Ham. DeCannio, sportingly, almost unbelievably catches the ball there. What nerve does that take? How many players would have headed out? goalwards and the whole ground rises to what must be one of the moments of the season. The Everton goalkeeper was lying down injured. DeCannio could have done what many players would have done and just scored the goal. He hadn't injured the goalkeeper, but he did the right thing, the sporting thing,

and as a result, he'll always be remembered as a magnificent sportsman. And let's come to a man named Trevor Chappell, who will always be reviled for once bowling underarm to stop Australia losing a match against New Zealand. An underarm. If you ever believed it, and that's a disappointing finish. Disappointed Brian with kicking the crowd boom. And it's all over.

So what happened there was that New Zealand wanted six to win off the last ball in a one-day game against Australia. So Australia's captain, Trevor Chappell's brother, Greg, instructed him to bowl underarm to just prevent any chance of New Zealand winning. That too was in the rules at the time. They got changed later after that incident. But it clearly wasn't in the spirit of the game. England's Stuart Broad summed up the Beirstow debacle perfectly.

So you'll ever be remembered for it? I suspect that's true. Alex Carey, that wicketkeeper, will probably now always have an asterisk by his name as the guy that did that to Johnny Beirstow, as well as captain who didn't withdraw the appeal. And although some Australian media reveled in what happened, Others were more embarrassed.

The Australian Daily Telegraph said Australia forever taints famous Ashes Win. And the sports journalist Phil Rothfield wrote, The greatest moments in Australian sport are often not about winning, but great acts of sportsmanship. This Ashes win will be remembered, but not for the right reasons. Well, exactly. Where's the glory in winning a sport if in the process of winning you abandon basic honour, integrity and fair play?

Well, joining me his former England cricket legend, Sir Geoffrey Boycott, the Conservative peer Lord Marlon, who was at Lords yesterday, and the Australian cricket commentator Melinda Farrell. I'm also joined in the studio by the Associated to the Daily Mirror, Kevin McGuire. Okay, well, this is a great line-up to have. So, Geoffrey, I read your brilliant column in the Telegraph, Daily Telegraph earlier today, in which you demanded an apology from the Australian team.

Tell me why you think that is in order. Well, I didn't demand anything. I said it would be wister. Look, if he doesn't know the rights between playing right to the letter of the law and what is good for the spirit of the game, then I don't know I can't teach him. In 1932-33, when the body line was played, it was Australia that first started it by sending a telegram

that didn't like bodyline, which was within the rules by Jardine and his team beating them, and they sent a telegram to the MCC saying this is not cricket, it's not in the spirit of the game. So those in Australia who were siding with the Australians, so playing to the letter of the law, as it were, should go back to 193233, and also their captain told Plum Warner,

who was the manager of the MCC team, who went into the dressing room, and Warner got told by the captain of the captain of, Australia. There are two teams out there, and only one is playing cricket. So they didn't like the way it was being played within the rules. And they went further than that. After the series was lost by Australia, they got England, pressured them to change the rules of the game, the laws of the game. And they also said, when we're due to come to you in 1938 to play a tour of England, if you're going to ball body line, we're not coming. And MCC said, okay, we won't.

came on the tour. So they were the first to start this about the standards in the game. And if Pat Cummings and his team don't know what standards are, then I can't teach him. And if you want to win at any cost, that's not good. And Jeffrey, Jeffrey, for those... You're going to be a nation known for gamesmanship, underhand things. Jeffrey, for those who are not massive cricket fans but are aware of this because it's all over the front pages and the TV news, in your estimation, what happened here that was wrong? I've

thought to the more. The The more the best best to know the

for the fairs for the fair and you're to be the $15 dollar of the

abe. Explore its origins and the parkour and it are what it's

today today the new the opportunity the off of the off the endosos

C for the details the conditions so so plight well Well, first of all, Johnny Birstow was dozy, dafters the brush, for wandering around, because usually you have to wait for the umpire at the bowler's end to call over.

That means the ball is dead. You cannot be out then. So he should have waited for the umpire to call over at the end of the over. Or if he wanted to go down the pitch and tap down the pitch, which happens often, or talk to his mate, the captain, he should have looked behind at Kerry and sort of, is it okay? Carey should would have nodded and off he went. That's the way you do it. He didn't do any of those, so he was a bit daft and dozy. Kerry did what you do instinctively, emotionally, in the middle of a game.

But having reflected on it, Cummings, him, the team should have said, hang on, hang on a minute. And if they couldn't do it then, they can do it now. They can think, hang on, we win the game. Brilliant cricket played by both teams. Lots of wonderful entertainment for everybody. you've spoilted it at the end. You've tarnished it.

You've tarnished your good name. You've tarnished cricket. Put your hand up and say, hey, in the heat of the moment, we got it wrong. We'd like to say we fulsomely apologise. It won't happen again, that sort of thing. Shake hands when you meet Ben Stokes, move on. Everybody be much happier because there's nothing wrong with anybody, me included. We make mistakes with human beings.

Put your hand up when you made a mistake and say, hey, I got it wrong. I'm sorry. Don't do it again. Melinda Farrell, you've heard that from the great Sir Geoffrey, one of the all-time great England cricketers and Ashes Legends, who actually in his column also told a fascinating story, which I'll just quickly paraphrase, where he was playing against the Australians,

and he handled the ball, and the wicket-keeper, Wally Grout, actually said to him, don't do that son, rather than appeal and get him out, which was an extraordinary act of sportsmanship. That's how it used to be. Melinda, you cannot be happy with what you witnessed there. That's not how Australia would feel happy

winning an Ashes game, is it? No, I think the players feel quite okay about how that's happened. I actually agree with some stuff that you've said, peers in there and with Sir Geoffrey as well. Look, there's so much water boutsary that comes into things like this when it happens. And I think because passions are so inflamed,

people often tend to see things through the prism of which team it's happened to, whether it's their team or the opposition, whether they like that team, and also whether they win or lose. I think it's a great shame that this has overshadowed Ben Stokes playing the most magnificent innings

I've seen in place since the last magnificent, ridiculous innings that he played. And maybe that wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for this incident because it fired him up to do something incredible. I think the spirit of cricket, When people start talking about that, it can be very nebulous.

It can mean different things to different people. You ask people, and it's very hard to define because it doesn't really define anything much in there apart from... You know, Alinda, you know, I thought about this. I've heard people say this. I think it's undefinable. If it was definable, it would be written in the laws, right? The spirit of cricket, though, comes when everybody basically feels in their bones

that something unfair has happened. I think. And I don't think you can possibly look at Beirstow, who you see scraping his boot inside the crease, which is what batsmen do either with their boot or their bat to denote it's the end of an over. And then to casually walk down to speak to his captain, every Australian player knew what he was doing. They all knew he wasn't trying to get an advantage. So to run him out in the way that they did, to stump him as they tried to describe it. I don't think he's a stumping, but whatever you want to call it. For Pat Cummings, he's missed a nice guy. After we had the whole incident, of course, around Sandpaper Gate, where all hell broke loose in Australia. And many Australians were as outraged as we were by Sandpaper Gate. I'm just surprised that Pat Cummings, who seems a pretty decent guy, didn't do the right thing

and actually make the world feel good about Australia and sportsmanship. Well, I think that's up to Pat Cummins as far as where he's, thinks that sort of dismissal falls. I do know that a lot of people who have been contacting me say that you see this a lot in, it's instinctive from the keeper. So I don't think anyone has an issue with it actually being

out. And as Sir Geoffrey said, it was a mistake by Berto. So he's made a mistake. Kerry hasn't done the wrong thing. And it's something that a lot of keepers do do instinctively. They had noticed he was wandering out of his crease. And Bairstow had done something similar

a couple of days. No, the person I I blame, the person I blame is the captain. Because I've seen MS. Doni, the former Indian captain, in a similar situation, actually reverse the decision, withdraw the appeal. This has been done before. And those captains, by the way, when they do that kind of thing, they get revered forever in cricket folklore for being sportsmen. And that's why, again, I'm surprised.

I want to bring in Lord Marlon. Lord Marlon, I saw you on day one of the Lord's test. We were in neighbouring boxes, enjoying the match. And then you were there yesterday, I think, which is a very important. very different atmosphere. What did you make of what happened there? And also, what did you make of what happened? I was there for three days, not yesterday, but...

Right, okay, so you were there the first three days. So I presume you watched what was going on yesterday. Oh, yeah. What did you make of what happened on the pitch? And also, what did you make of what happened in the Laws Pavilion? The scenes of which, I got to say, I found the spectacle of MCC members chanting cheat, cheat, cheat, was pretty disgusting, actually. I'm glad action has been taken against him.

but it's so the measure of the anger and the ground. What did you make of what happened and the fallout? Well, I totally agree with you, which often I do, Pear, it was very unsporting. I think you're completely right that the captain should have on-field made the decision. Look, you know, well done, Kerry, but we're not going to call you out, go back to your crease, which would have been the sportsman-like thing to do. Of course, in defence of Cummings, it's a very instant decision you've got to make. You don't have the opportunity of time.

You have to make a decision at the moment. But I think the thing is defined by Ben Stokes in a way in what he said afterwards, which, and I think Ben Stokes is one of the great sporting heroes, that he said he wouldn't have done it himself, and that for me is good enough. Of course, the rivalry, you know, it is just another twist, isn't it, in the Australia, England or the Ashes series, it's not an attractive one. They'll get booed every time they walk out on the ground.

If that's what they want, that's fine. I totally agree with you about the behaviour in the long room. It's very unseemly. But, you know, cricket has moved on from this very polite life that you have at the MCC to a contrast of Edgerson, where I was also, where there's this sort of rowdy crowd, really exciting atmosphere. and so, you know, it's where's that balance.

And, of course, the longroom for that point of view is sacrosanct, but it could be argued if you're out in the crowd, you'd have done that. Kevin McGuire, you're still listening to all this. I mean, are we, as many Australians claim, you know, Melinda referenced the water bouchery, there are episodes in England's cricketing pass, which wouldn't shine up very well if you put the spirit of cricket test to it. I was at a game at the Oval in 2008,

when one of the New Zealand players ran into our bowler, a complete accident. He fell over and was run out and we didn't withdraw the appeal. I thought that was completely wrong. So I think I'd be consistent. I don't like any of this stuff. What do you make of it?

Yeah, I think of Ollie Pope and New Zealand in the slips. It's an LBW appeal. The Kiwi batsman wanders out. Takes the stumps off. And Berstow's all high fives and great fun. I think we're in danger in England. I wanted England.

The difference there is, though. Nobody thought the play was dead. Now, well, I think the batsman did. I think he thought it was going to be an appeal. He was waiting for the umpire and the... But play would be deemed still active. I think we're in danger of sounding bad, losers and whining, winging palms. Look, it was in the rules.

This is the Ashes. Fierces sporting contest. Are you an Aussie skipper going to give that away? Ben Stombs from the day? I would say if your... I would say if your country... has been through San Papergate, where the captain and vice captain

both had to resign their jobs in tears on television. This was a brilliant opportunity for Pat Cummings, who, by all accounts, is a good guy, a great opportunity for him to reset the profile of the Australian cricket team on the global stage by doing something that he may not have been sent if he wanted to, but felt actually was the right thing. But it's not San Paper Gate.

San Paper Gate was clear. Well, that was cheating. It was clear cheating. This is not cheating. It was within the rules. The umpires. What happened to the umpires decision as final? The umpires gave him out.

Now, I agree with Lord Marland, though, the behaviour of the Hurria Henry's, the poshooligans in the pavilion. Look, they've got privileged access to the players. It doesn't mean you have to smother them with kisses. I didn't like that at all. I thought that was... And also chanting cheat, cheat, cheat, cheat when they haven't actually cheated. I thought that was completely wrong.

So, Geoffrey, let me come back to you for the final word. I always like to do that. The next test match starts in a few days. at Headingley, your neck of the woods, your great ground where you broke so many records. This, I would imagine, is going to fire up the England team like nothing else could possibly do. It would also fire up that Yorkshire crowd like nothing else could possibly. It's going to be like the Colosseum, let me tell you. They'll be ready for them, no doubt at all.

What do you have to remember? I don't like Kevin's point, because if everybody played to the rules, absolute letter of the rules, what would happen now is England and its players would be looking to get their own back. So then we'd be tip for tat all the type, looking for gamesmanship, underhand things, and the cricket, as we know it, would disintegrate. Because players would be looking to score a point, get their own back.

Is that what we want at cricket? No. We want cricketers and teams just looking to get their own back, gamesmanship, underhand things, dirty things. You know, I don't want that at cricket. The cricket played by these two teams, they're fairly equal. We've been deft enough to do stupid things at the moments when we were winning the match, and we should have been two-nill, not two-neill down.

We're equal to them. We could easily beat them, but we're doing deaf things. But that's not the point. It's not about the winning and losing it. It's about the standards of the game. And when you're talking about the members of MCC, they're not all hooray Henry's with lots of money and gone to private schools. It was an emotional moment.

I agree it was unsavory, and they deserve a censure. But I don't think they deserve to lose their membership at all. It's an emotional moment. It certainly wasn't as bad as what the Australian captain didn't do. And I agree with you, Piers. He had a moment there, an opportunity to square things with the world because what they did in Cape Time was pure and simply cheating. And that's why they got chanting in the long room.

Not just for that incident, it's for what they did in Cape Town. That wasn't against the spirit of the game. That's pure and simple, cheating. So, Geoffrey, as always, magnificent to watch you batting. Thank you very much indeed for joining me. And Melinda, thank you. You bet me underpounding and we're going to win the ashes. I think to television now, stick to cricket.

I think we are going to win the ashes. Three, too. I think this will fire us to victory. Melinda, I want to thank you especially because we couldn't get any current or ex-Australian player or any other Australian media figure to come on, and you bravely came over the parapet to defend your country. Everyone's talking about cricket and the ashes. So at a time when everyone says, cricket's dying,

let's just enjoy the fact of everyone. It certainly isn't dying now. Great to see you, Le Mardle, great to see you. Kevin, thank you very much indeed. Ron says the next two British peers are under fire for attending a Russia Day party, organised by the Kremlin's man in London. I'll ask one of those peers what he was doing.

Next. Welcome back to Pierce, Morgan on Sensor. Russia's ambassador to London, Andre Kellyn, is banned from the Palace of Westminster over his country's illegal war in Ukraine. But that didn't stop two British Lords attending his Russia-day party last month. According to his only times, Kellyn defended the invasion and condemned the British government while guests quaffed vodka and snacked on bellini's. One of the peers, Lord Baalph, represents the governing Conservative Party in the House of Lords, and he joins me live from Westminster. Lord Balph, what are you doing at a party celebrating Russia

when the host of the party isn't even allowed to be in our parliament? Well, it was Russia's national day. All governments have national days in London. I was invited to the party. I've been in Russia and in Ukraine several times. I think we have to stop this war, and we're not going to stop it by shouting at each other. Well, we're not going to stop it by partying with the Russians when they're waging an illegal war, are we?

I think partying is not exactly the most accurate word for diplomatic reception. Well, it was a party. It was a party to celebrate Russia day. Yeah, it was celebrating the creation of a Russian independent of this over union. Yeah, let's not squabble too much, but it was a reception. Everybody was totally well-behaved. Half the Commonwealth was there, which is something the Brits might like to note. But my basic reason for being there is I want to get this war stopped. And the first way of stopping it, we've got to get the Russians to say what they actually want in Ukraine.

It's no good running around the place smashing it up. We need to know what they want so that we've got a basis of negotiation. Well, the truth is they are running around, smashing it up, and they clearly want to take Ukraine. Putin, I would say, clearly he wants to restore as much of a Soviet Union as he can. But either way, Kellyn, the ambassador, gave a speech where he tried to justify the invasion of Ukraine and condemned Britain's confrontational foreign policy.

Did you, at that stage, interject and tell him that actually the invasion was illegal and that Britain's foreign policy is not confrontational? I've already told him that. The invasion was certainly unwise and incidentally illegal. But no, you don't interject in situations like this. But I did make it quite clear that I think the Russians need to work out a way of stopping the fighting.

And the first bit of that is to be quite clear as to what they want. And it's no good wanting to conquer Ukraine because all they would do is they would end up with the civil war that would go on and on and on. So we need a much clearer focus. And shouting from the sidelines and arming them, I understand the latest idea is to give them cluster bombs.

I don't think that's very smart. Well, the alternative is that Ukraine's... Incidentally, I don't represent the Conservative Party. No, I know you don't. I sit as a Conservative member. Sure. I understand. But you're there as a... Big difference.

You're there as a Conservative member of the House of Lords. Many people were outraged that you were there hobnobbing with the Russian ambassador, given the current situation. It's not an unwise invasion. It's an illegal barbaric invasion where many tens of thousands of Ukrainians have been slaughtered. And the truth is, if we don't arm them in the way that we've been arming them, many, many more will be slaughtered. I mean, that's pretty self-evident, isn't it?

Well, if we want to run a proxy war in the middle of Europe, where two different sides kill each other mercilessly go ahead. I'd rather go for peace. We'd all love peace. We'd all love peace. We'd all love peace, but would you, for example, so the Ukrainians can go back home.

We'd all love that. With respect, Lordbath, everybody would love peace. Everyone in Ukraine would love to go back to how things were. Unfortunately, they are having a war waged on them by Vladimir Putin and his murderous, army. Now, let me ask you this. Would you have gone to a party, for example, if it was hosted by a Nazi ambassador at the start of World War II? We don't have a Nazi ambassador.

Would you have gone to the German ambassador's residence for a nice party as the Nazis were embarking on their global domination plan? If I'd have been interested in Germany, like Chamberlain and Rab Butler at the Foreign Office, I would probably have gone to the German embassy up to Czechoslovakia, but not afterwards. All right, so you have party limits? Yes. Good to know. Lord Baal, thanks for joining me.

Kevin, good. I don't think he should be attending parties, the Russian ambassador. I don't think he should be there saying this invasion was unwise. No. And I think he's got this rather quaint idea that so many of them have who sort of do these kind of things with the Russians. We all want peace. Well, of course we do. But the Ukrainians haven't started this war.

Yeah. Look, Richard Balf, Lord Balf, it's a useful idiot. There's a propaganda coup for the Kremlin. They can say they have members of the House of Lords and ruling UK Conservative Government from that party at their reception. And we saw one of the latest atrocities, a dozen people, including three children killed in a piece of. a restaurant and he's going to somewhere where they're serving food and drink.

To hobnob with the ambassador. I think he's got a misguided view of his own self-importance. He thinks he's going to have any real role with the Russians. But to say it is unwise that invasion. I'm sorry, that sounds a little bit to me like an apologetic way. It does. Look, it was an unprovoked aggression against a country that has cost probably now, it lies more than 100,000 on the two sides.

people injured, Ukraine trashed. It's not a proxy war, I'm a peacenik. You probably won't get anyone more opposed to wars than me. But I can see when Ukraine is invaded in this way. You can do nothing but send weapons and support it and hope Putin or somebody at some point will withdraw. Kevin, good to talk to you. Good to stone.

Thank you very much indeed. On the next, everyone's talking about Barbie, subject to the most hotly anticipated movie of the year. but it's you a secret man-hater. Is that what this movie's all about? We'll debate that next with three women. I'll be on the Kinside. Welcome back to Pierceville and a sense.

Barbie has long been criticized by feminists as a symbol of unattainable princess-like perfection. The iconic Mattel doll is now the inspiration for a Hollywood movie, one of the most anticipated of the entire year, capping Barbie's evolution from symbol of the patriarchy to feminist icon. Barbie's small and so petite.

Barbie has smart new styles for every occasion. For dates with Ken, club meetings, tennis. Do you meet me at the mall? Listen. Do you have a crush on anyone? Does anybody know how big the brain is? Sophia. It is me.

What's going on? Why are these men looking at me? Yeah, they're also staring at me. So, fantastic, plastic feminist icon, all-sexist clap track. With the movie's outrageously dismissive tagline, He is everything. He is just Ken. Has Barbie actually done a full 180? Is she now anti, not just Ken, but men?

Well, I'm joined by Talk TV contributor, Esther Cracko, and also by Talk TV presenter, Rosanna Lockwood. And also, drum roll, back from the world's longest holiday by Grace Blakely, our socialist commentator. I love calling you that. Welcome back. Welcome back. We've almost missed you. I have missed you very much as well, obviously.

and you're wearing your Barbie outfit. I have apparently been told. And you've gone bald as I'll saw you. You did this on purpose. I mean, I can't say that I did. You did this to seduce me. Yes, you now are. You did this to seduce me.

That is a massive compliment. Honestly, if I look anything like Margot Robbie, I will take that. So look, let's start with you then on this, giving you come dressed as Barbie. So there are a number of Barbie characters in the movie. One plays President Barbie, one plays Dr Barbie, one plays a Barbie with a Nobel Prize in physics. One is a mermaid Barbie.

However, all the male characters in Barbie world are simply called Ken. So it's pretty clear where this movie is going. This is an assault on not just Ken, but all men. I mean, I think men in general will have to be a bit kind of snowflakey to suggest they're being assaulted by a Barbie movie. But I kind of think that's besides the point.

I mean, I think, you know, the questions that we have around this one, whether or not Barbie is a feminist icon. Is she? Actually, well, I think it matters less than the fact that the Barbie franchise has commercialized the feminist critique. So now you can be like, oh, you can feel like a good feminist because you buy a doll for $2599,

or you can feel like a hashtag girl boss because Barbie has a Nobel Prize or Barbie's an entrepreneur. Whereas actually, feminism is rooted in the struggles of ordinary women. It's about the fact that, you know, women often get paid less. It's about the fact that women are on the front line of some of the hardest sectors to work in and care. in our healthcare system

and social care. It's about the fact that they do so much unpaid labour in the household. How many female bricklayers do you know? What female bin cleaner? Great question. What are you talking about? Great question. Have you ever met a female bricklayer? I don't know. No, you haven't.

But I love the assumption that being a bricklayer is harder than like caring for the terminally ill and dying. Have you ever been a bricklayer in the winter? But like, have you ever been someone of the top of the family of dying? Yes, yes, I have. Yes, I have. Obviously, it's a very, very challenging job, isn't it? And it's not as hard as being a bricklayer?

In what sense? What does that even mean? Excuse me, you asked me if I've done it before. Oh, I've missed this. I have. I have done it before. It's physically challenging, emotionally challenging. I mean, there are care workers who are running up and down between houses getting paid less than minimum wage.

No, I get that. But you don't make a fortune as a bricklayer either, and you're out in the element. I just don't understand why are you doing these professions against each other. It's a bizarre culta. Let me try and get one single word in here. So, Rosanna, look. Barbie's jobs include being an astronaut, a surgeon, Olympic athlete, downhill skier, aerobics instructor, TV news reporter,

vet, rock star, doctor, army officer, air force pilot, summit diplomat, rap musician, presidential candidate, baseball player, scuba diver, lifeguard, firefighter, engineered dentist and many more. I mean, she's not a bad feminist icon. She's done everything. She's had over 200 careers, apparently, since she was first conceived. Is she a feminist icon?

Look, when you said unattainable princess, perfect-like perfection, this is what you were thinking of. These three women here, it's true. I think all three of us perfectly imperfect. Can we settle on that? We probably all played with Barbies going up. I'm going to guess that. Given Barbie's enormous reach now, given how many different Barbie dolls are now, you can almost have a Barbie doll for any type, whatever, is she legitimately a feminist icon? No, I don't think she is, but there are other toys available if you don't like her. Why does Barbie need to be a feminist icon?

Why can't girls just play with pretty dolls? I don't think that she should be a feminist icon. Young girls don't even understand anything to do with feminism. I don't think that feminism should be co-opted by massive multinational corporations. Well, that's fine, but I don't think young girls even need to learn about it. But Grace, what about if it's shaping the way young girls are growing up? Well, I mean, I think this is the problem people have with feminism. This is why we end up having all these debates about like, oh, you know,

feminism doesn't account for the struggles of ordinary people, and it's just like very rich and wealthy women at the top of companies saying, I want more money. It's because feminism, which is actually a critique of capitalism, in part, has been taken over by big multinational corporations

who basically say, look, we have three women on our board, so the gender struggle is over. And it's just, this is a symptom of a wider problem. All right, you mentioned gender. The Bank of England says anyone can get pregnant of any gender identity. They've offered to help staff

to pay for gender reassignment treatment, including, Now, this has all been going on in your absence, at nauseam, some might think, this whole gender debate. But this concept that anyone of any gender identity can become pregnant is obviously ludicrous. I mean, I'm going to start before even opening up into this discussion talking about, yes, I've been away for nine months,

and I've come back and watched how our entire political debate has become dominated by this tiny, tiny fringe issue. We have this massive moral panic over an issue that affects so few people. It's not a fringe issue. The climate is literally, like, the earth is getting towards a massive impact of point while there's a massive cost of living crisis going on. Hang on. I was honestly just shocked that this is what we're talking about.

You can care about the climate, and you can also care about the full frontal attack on the integrity of women's sport because of transgender athletes. You can care about men rapists being put into female prisons. That cost Nicola Sturgeon her job, by the way. You can care about all those issues too. And yet, this is what we're talking about. You know what? I've seen the lightbiz. You're right about this.

And yet, this is what we're talking about. There is a reason that we are talking about this issue rather than the Bank of England just raised interest rates. That's going to mean that millions of families are not going to be able to repay their debt, repay their loans. They're going to be pushed into poverty. And here we are talking about some, you know, absurd thing about whether or not. I think you've just hit the nail on the head because shouldn't the Bank of England be more concerned with bringing down inflation rates than, you know, offering their approach. Yes. I'm sure. I'm sure this was just some sort of random thing that was.

No, it's not right. But that's not. Hang on a headline. Or economic expert. If you look at the crux of the issue, this was actually probably a freedom of information request. Stonewall, the Bank of England applied to Stonewall to say, we want to be in your top 100 list of diversity and inclusion sort of index thing.

This was last year they made this application. The information has only been revealed now. And I would say that that is the Telegraph and other papers capitalising on the argument that the Bank of England has lacks monetary policy and they're trying to make the argument that they've been too focused on diversity. That it's playing up to cult. But let's be clear. in the WOMP Brigade or whatever.

Well, you can have 120,000 genders, as many as you like. Only women can get pregnant. But like... I mean, that's just a biological fact. Only women get pregnant. People... You can have as many gender debates as you want. You can feel like a mouse for all I get.

But you can't actually pretend anyone other than a biological female can have a baby. Yeah, sure. Only people who are born women can get pregnant. You accept that. People who are born women can also become men. Not become... Identify as anything. who become men can also legitimately become mothers.

They can't become men. They can't become men. Biological men are biological men. Yeah, I mean, if you're born in women, you can become a trans man. They can be a trans man. They can be a man. Why do we have to change you with it? I mean, I made this point to you like a year ago, and I thought we kind of settled it. You know, you have cis women and trans women and cis men and trans men.

We don't have to get all up in arms about all this stuff. It just doesn't matter that much. I'm so glad you do so get up in arms about this. I've really missed this. Esther, I mean, I agree with you. The Bank of England, get on with fixing the economic crisis. It's the optics of this that's even more frustrating because you don't want a news story of the Bank of England

paying for their employees, gender transitioning when they're clearly bigger issues at hand here. But I think it's just this obsession with companies that feel like they have to talk about these issues all the time. I'm just happy for a business to function as a business. I don't need to know their stance on gender identity or anything. I actually agree. Well, that's in itself a shocking moment.

Do any of you have a view about Johnny Bester and the way he was out at Lords? I saw this. My dad showed me. This was the clip where he... What was your dad say? My dad said that it was slightly unfair to have knocked him out

and that there should have been... What did he say? That it should have been reviewed or something and that ordinarily that's what would have happened because there was some precedent for it. Your dad's right. Okay. No idea.

No view? No view. Less than zero. Brilliant. It's great to have you back. Let me see that. Really. Nearly almost enjoyed that segment.

It's been great. I really missed you. Unsensen next, the comedian writer, star of the stage and screen. Ahmed Jalili joins me live on to Iran, immigration, while the late queen uncannselled him. Strawberry twist. Welcome back to Piers Morgan, Annsets. My next guest is best known as an actor and stand-up comedian. He's now turned the spotlight on to free speech and the vicious regime and his family's native Iran.

Ahmed Jalili joins me now. Omid Jaliyah, great to have you back on the program. Let me start before we get to Iran. which is a passion thing that you want to talk about, and I get that. This Rwanda story ongoing about how we're going to deal with the small boats, with refugees, asylum seekers, and perhaps people trying it on as well. What's your take of it? Well, you know, as a proud Iranian, I'm very happy to tell you that on the UN building,

there's a Persian poet called Saadi who has his poem on the building. And the translation says, if you do not feel human pain, the name human, you cannot retain. And I think that's really powerful because where I live in Suffolk now, I've got to know some Iranian asylum seekers who've literally run away. They've been here since January. They've run away from the regime. And they're very frustrated because they can't work. They love Iran. They don't want to be in Britain, but now they're here. They want to contribute. One of them is a tennis player. And we did this Turkey-Syria benefit gig, and they spoke. They spoke so powerfully. They were saying, why can't we make love and unity the dictatorship? Why can't we, to see the world as

one globe is very, very important. I think, and we saw Fiona Bruce on question time asking, do you agree with the Rwanda? It was amazing. It was amazing. Not a single hand went up. And it was a mainly conservative audience. Yeah, I thought that was a really wonderful moment.

And it really gave me hope that British people are good. And we understand that when people run away, they're running away from awful regimes that we were going to talk about, where if they stayed, they'd be killed. They're not all running from awful regimes. No, not all of course. I mean, we had the issue with a lot of Albanian, young Albanian economic migrants coming and so on.

Where do we draw the line? What is the right way to handle this? Well, I don't know, but all I can tell you is that knowing these Iranian asylum seekers, and their asylum seekers in the sense that they can't work until they have their residential papers, we have to speed things up because they've been here for five, six months.

They're desperate to continue. The processing system seems completely broken. Yeah, exactly. And that's causing a lot of the irritations, I think. It's a great story that the Queen was upset with the BBC for editing out your migrant joke about Rwanda? It was ITV. I think there was a little segment where the night before we had some practice nights and I did this joke about please, for God's sake, don't send me to Rwanda.

And ITV said, I think we'll drop that for the Queen. Oh, it was ITV, right. It was ITV. It was for the horse show, was a pageant, the Jubilee pageant. And she was a bit upset because she heard what happened to the Rwanda joke and they goes, it got cut, and she was a bit annoyed. But then again, I understand because you can't show the royal family commenting on. on governmental policy. But interesting that she would have preferred it in.

They've got a great sense of humour. They do love a laugh. And I did do a joke about how, thanks for choosing us over the state opening a parliament, it was the big elephant in the room. She did that thing with her hand, like, you know, you're very cheeky but I like you kind of thing. So it was fun.

Let's turn to Iran and the women of Iran in particular. This has been a big running story now for a while. Do we care enough in the West about what's going on? here. Is there enough of a light being shown? Well, on the one sense, there is a women-led revolution going on, and we're all surprised that the Western press are not picking up on it. But there is this campaign

which I'm very proud to stand with, which is called Our Story is One campaign that reminds everyone, and a lot of Iranians don't know about this. 40 years ago, 10 women, 10 Baha'i women, and of course, they're part of a faith which was outlawed in Iran. They were asked to recant their beliefs or

face the death, and they didn't. And it was an amazing moment of standing up for freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of belief, and all ten were hanged. And one of them was a 17-year-old girl called Mona Mahmoud Najad, who then became very well known, not just for being someone who was very powerfully stood against the regime, but she also became opposed to person for child executions. Six years later, the United Nations put these things where they to stop child executions, because she was 17 years old. And unfortunately, the only country that still carries out child executions is

the Islamic Republic of Iran. You, because of your outspokenness on this issue, and it's been very courageous, but you've had a huge amount of attacks on social media from Iranian bots and so on. We saw what happened to Salman Rushdie, of course, which is a vicious attack on his free speech. Yes.

Do you worry about this? I worry a bit for my mental health because what I'm doing is I'm trying to give my social media over to the voiceless, because you know what they do? First, before they start killing people, they cut the internet. So through VPN, they put out a couple of videos, And those of us go through it, and they're really horrific.

And I can only put out a few things which I think are palatable for an English-speaking audience. But at the same time, I think it's very important to get stories out. For the 10 women of Shiraz, what we did, we did this little video about an English girl playing the last moments of her life. And the question was that just because it's not happening here, it doesn't mean that it's not happening. So I think that even though I'm being attacked,

I am more worried about my own mental health, seeing all these horrific videos. But at the same time, social media is our... weapon and you've got to keep putting it out. What's your key message to people watching this about what's happening in Iran? It's basically get involved. Have a look what's going on. Our Story is One campaign is also a creative one. Have a look at how we can support the women of Iran. And also, we have to say, with Salman Rushdie was being, you know, attacked and killed. And there were all these videos of people, you know, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

He's still alive, obviously. Yeah, he's still alive. Yeah, but still. They tried to kill him. They tried to kill him. But the Islamic Republic of Iran are putting out all these videos, asking jihadists to kill people, blow up embassies, blow up libraries. And why we're asking the big question, why is it? Why is it that ISIS, there was a concerted effort to eradicate them with the Islamic Republic of Iran, our vice chairman of the, of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Great to see you. Thanks for coming in. I appreciate it. Thank you. That's it from me. We're up to keep it uncensored.

Good night.